Sex, mutation and fitness: asymmetric costs and routes to recovery through compensatory evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A wild-type population of Drosophila melanogaster was used to assess the impact of a known deleterious mutation, nub(1), when it had (1) evolved for up to 180 generations with the mutation or (2) recently had the same mutant allele introgressed into it. Relative to this benchmark, we observed much stronger initial fitness depression in males (-74%) than in females (-38%) and also relatively greater fitness recovery by evolved males (+55%) than females (+17%). Experimental assays revealed amelioration in both juvenile and adult fitness and suggested that the greater relative recovery of male fitness was from gains through sexual selection. These evolutionary changes in male fertility depended on pairing with their coevolved mates for both mate choice and post-copulatory components of sexual selection. Without replication at the population level, these results are used to motivate a general hypothesis rather than definitively test it: Differences in reproductive optima may generally skew mutational effects towards the more strongly sexually-selected sex due to genic capture and condition dependence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".